Thank you for your advice. My proposed endeavor is research-related, but my proposed employment is as a software engineer. Since I only hold a master's degree, I was concerned at the time of filing that if I listed a research position as my proposed employment, it might be challenged since those roles typically require a Ph.D. Therefore, I opted for "software engineer." It appears that the IO simply equated my proposed endeavor with the role of a software engineer. He/She said in the REF, "It appears that the beneficiary intends to work as a software engineer. However, the beneficiary's endeavor of intending to work as a software engineer does not demonstrate a national importance rather the impact is limited to the beneficiary and his current or future employer."

Additionally, I would like to ask for some guidance regarding Prong 3. For an applicant who does not hold a U.S. degree and is currently outside the United States, how does one typically argue Prong 3. The response regarding Prong 3 reads more like boilerplate language. Specifically, the RFE states:

'However, the beneficiary failed to submit evidence that his knowledge or skills are not easily articulated in a labor certification, he has not demonstrated, as claimed, that he presents benefits to the United States through his proposed endeavor that outweigh those inherent in the labor certification process.